PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Participatory and collaborative approaches in sustainability science and public health research contribute to co-producing evidence that can support interventions by involving diverse societal actors that range from individual citizens to entire communities. However, existing philosophical accounts of evidence are not adequate to deal with the kind of evidence generated and used in such approaches. In this paper, we present an account of evidence as clues for action through participatory and collaborative research inspired by philosopher Susan Haack\'s theory of evidence. Differently from most accounts of evidence for use in policies and interventions, our account combines action-oriented (the how) and actors-oriented (the who) considerations. We build on Haack\'s theory and on the analysis of examples of participatory and collaborative research in sustainability science and public health research to flesh out six procedural criteria for the generation and mobilization of evidence in and from participatory research. Action-oriented criteria invite to look at evidence from a (a) foundherentist, (b) gradational and (c) quasi-holistic perspective. Actors-oriented criteria point out that evidence generation and utilization are (d) social, (e) personal, and (f) embedded. We suggest that these criteria may reinforce participatory and collaborative approaches to evidence co-production when addressing complex problems in sustainability science and public health allowing for the generation of a kind of practical objectivity.
摘要：
可持续发展科学和公共卫生研究的参与和协作方法有助于共同产生证据，这些证据可以通过涉及从个人公民到整个社区的各种社会行为者来支持干预措施。然而,现有的哲学解释证据不足以处理这种方法中产生和使用的证据。在本文中,我们通过哲学家SusanHaack的证据理论启发的参与式和协作式研究，提出了证据作为行动线索的说明。与大多数用于政策和干预的证据不同，我们的账户结合了面向行动(如何)和面向行为者(谁)的考虑。我们以Haack的理论为基础，并对可持续发展科学和公共卫生研究中的参与式和协作式研究的实例进行了分析，以充实六个程序标准，以在参与式研究中和从参与式研究中产生和动员证据。以行动为导向的标准邀请查看(A)创始人的证据，(b)分级和(c)准整体视角。面向参与者的标准指出，证据的产生和利用是(D)社会，(e)个人，(f)嵌入。我们建议，在解决可持续发展科学和公共卫生中的复杂问题时，这些标准可能会加强参与式和协作式的证据联合生产方法，从而产生一种实用的客观性。
